defeated j.d. hayworth in their primary race. after he was declared the winner, he spoke with supporters in phoenix for about 10 minutes. .

i will do my best to prove worthy of the honor. i have never and will never take your support for granted or feel i am entitled to your trust without burning it, for it is your trust that is the great ambition. i have often said i am one of the most fortunate people in the world. i have had the honor of serving our country in good times and bad since i was first sworn in at the naval academy.

[applause] i thank you all for allowing me to represent our beautiful state and the rights and streams of the people blessed to call it home. i wish them well in the future. we have more than two months of

hard campaigning ahead of us, and i am sure we will face a spirited challenge from the democratic nominee. i promise i will take nothing for granted. i will fight with every ounce of conviction i possess to make the case for my continued service in the senate and the policies and principles i will defend if i am fortunate enough to be reelected. [applause] this will be a consequential reelection. no one should have any doubt about that. no one is satisfied with the condition of our country. i know arizonans are rightly concerned with the direction we seem to be heading in. staggering unemployment, a river

of red ink that threatens prosperity and the prosperity of future generations of americans who will struggle to pay the costs of mistakes made before they were born, and the government that does not seem to realize the trouble we are in and do what is necessary to fix it effectively. i am convinced republicans will win in november, and we will gain the majority in both houses. [applause] we will win house seats right here in arizona. we will lead in arizona.

we will stop out of control spending and repeal and replace obamacare. we will keep families in their home. we will allow businesses to grow without washington interference. we will secure our borders, defend our nation, and bring our troops home from afghanistan with honor and victory. we must always act only on your behalf. we must share your concerns and help bear your burdens, defend your rights, and support your dreams, and i will fight to do the one thing every american generation has done, to leave a

better country to their children than the one they inherited. americans cannot afford to continue to ransom york futures, steal from your children, and grow the government beyond the size of what is necessary or wanted. you should be entrusted to make your own decisions for your family. there are things only government can do, and we must do them better and at less cost than you. we must trust in the freedom of americans that no government can ever do better than they can. we must recover the strength of our economy. we must make it easier for small businesses to help our economy grow. we have never confronted the

problem we could never overcome, and we never will. [applause] if i am privileged to win reelection, i will work night and day to help all americans overcome our difficulties and succeed, as we always have, in building a better country. i promise you i will work in what i believe to be the best interest of the state of arizona and the country i love, and i will always be indebted to you for the privilege of supporting you. thank you for your encouragement. we have had a good night. let's get our country back to building a future as great and honorable as are storied past.

-- ou storied past. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [applause] >> up next, the former agricultural official talks about a job offer she received. then remarks from john boehner on the economy and the republican agenda, and after that, the armed services suicide prevention task force delivers its final report. tomorrow morning, we look at the

economy and home sales, and the president of the american federation of futures discusses the u.s. education system as children across the country return to school, and after that, as part of our week-long series examining defense issues, we looked at it yusuf unmanned aerial vehicles in afghanistan. -- at the use of unman security vehicles in afghanistan. we will focus on the rolls the private sector can play in homeland security forces. this is live wednesday morning at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 3. >> we now have a generation that really did not have the arts in the public schools. these are the 20-year olds, and i arm concerned about that group of people.

it is not clear that they are going to come to the arts. >> michael kaiser will talk about the struggling arts organization and the future of the arts in the u.s.. >> the former agricultural department official told reporters earlier today she turned down a job offer after meeting with the agriculture secretary. she was forced to resign over what appeared to be discriminatory remarks caught on video. after the video was found to be out of context with her speech, the secretary apologized and offered a new position. this is 20 minutes.

>> she unfortunately knows how far too much as a plaintiff in the case, and i think it is fair to say we think it is appropriate for the senate to take action to make sure the appropriations for those cases are made and that we get those cases settled as quickly as possible as well as the cases that have been filed against the department. we also talked about how there has been a number of claims that were not looked at and investigated. agaiwe have reopened those case, but we need to make sure we do justice to those not treated fairly by the department. shirley was also very interested in to work we were doing with an

independent consultant. the group was hired by us some time ago prior to this issue, in which we ask them to go into a number of states to take a real hard look at our current procedures in terms of how we deal with people to see if there are ways we can make sure we do not have problems of discrimination in the future. that work will be completed sometime this year, and that becomes relevant to the next steps for the department. i did my best to try to get her to come on a full-time basis. we talked about the office of the outreach and what her skills could bring to that office.

we also talked about the opportunities that would be made available to return to georgia in her position as the state director. that does not fit what she needs, what she wants, and what she deserves. we talked about the possibility of using her unique characteristics and experiences and her passion, her undying passion, to see discrimination routed from this country, so when we get the report from the consultant that tells us the steps we needed to take to improve our process and procedure, it is my hope that we can ask shirley to assist us as some sort of consultant for those recommendations, and i think there is no one in the country better suited to assist us then shirley. having been a victim of

discrimination, having had a family suffered a painful loss as a result of discrimination, having served as a director, knowing full well about the programs, and having worked to begin changing things in georgia so there was thereness and full opportunity, there is no one who can help us better than shirley, so we are looking forward to reconnecting. we also talked about the steps we are taking internally and some of the steps we are taking to improve decision making. >> good morning. i want to say thank you to the secretary for the updates and

the discussion we had this morning about what happens and the steps that will be taken in the future so hopefully no one else will have to deal with what i have had to deal with over the last four or five weeks. i enjoyed my work at the usda. i did not work with the government prior to a year ago. i did enjoy that work and would like to see that work continue. i do not think i can do that in the new position but was offered or a state director. it does not mean i am not interested in that work, because

i certainly am. i was working on many of those issues. i have had lots of support from around the country. i have had many thousands of pieces of mail, many of those zero would like to insert. -- i would like to answer. i would like to be able to deal with that, to sort of take a break from all that i have had to deal with over the last two weeks. i look forward to some type of relationship with the department in the future.

we do need to work on discrimination and racism in the future, and i look forward to playing our role in this process. >> would you tell us a little bit about the investigation into what happened? >> it starts with the responsibility i have to take to make sure instructions are clear and complete and comprehensive. it requires us to make sure we have sufficient staff in various offices. we need to do a better job of coordinating travel schedules.

we need to take a look of the process. we need a much more collaborative process, in gauging the senior staff members. we also have to make sure everyone has contact information that is accurate and complete. we also have to set of protocols to address situations where there may be disciplinary action to make sure their rights are protected. political appointees were treated differently, and we need to make sure there is a more parallel system so what she went through does not have to happen again. they are being incorporated into our procedure. >> the afternoon she came out and clarified what happened, it

became clear her remarks had been taken out of context. you still stood by the removal in the a media. why did you do that, and what changed your mind? was there pressure? >> because i was not in this office, i did not avail myself of the full range of advice and counsel. i was not aware the under secretary was trying to get ahold of me to say we had -- we should perhaps take more time to review. obviously, when the full transcript was main reason was made known to me, it was pretty obvious this was a situation where her comments were taken out of context, and the main message was not inconsistent as i originally thought, but very consistent with what we were trying to do.

she was trying to point out there was an issue of discrimination and bias in this country. the usda has so many opportunities to intersect with people. there needed to be an effort to make sure the usda was an example, an exemplary department when it comes to civil rights during of with the claims filed against us, -- of civil rights. with the claims filed against us in the past, we have work to do. all this led me to believe i had made a mistake, which i acknowledge and said i was sorry i had done and as for her forgiveness. >> is this is satisfactory conclusion to what you have gone through in the past five or six weeks, and wouldn't it be more a

sense of completion if you had stayed in this building and worked on discrimination rather than going off and taking a break and not being directly involved in the process? >> the secretary did push really hard for me to stay and work from the inside in the position. it is a new position. i look at what happened, and i know he has apologized, and i accept that. he said the new processes in place, and i hope it works. i do not want to be the one to test it.

i think i can be helpful to him and the department if i take a break and look at how i can be helpful in the future. i guess that is enough. >> it is important to understand why she has unique opportunities here. she was beginning a process of going into counties and areas of her state where there was deep poverty, high unemployment, not much of rage from previous -- not much out reached -- outreach from previous areas. she was making sure they were appreciated and health. that is the kind of work i suspect will come forward with recommendations of the review

that has taken place. at that point, we can tailor an opportunity to meet those recommendations, and she will help implement them with a focus where she is not worried about administrative issues, having to deal with personnel or budgets. she will be able to focus on what she was doing in georgia, being able to balance that time. she and her husband have been struggling for 45 years. she has children and grandchildren she would like to spend time with. i do not want people to think

she cannot be of significant help. i think she will be able to devote the passion she wants. >> how much time are you looking to take off, and any vision on what you want future collaboration to be? >> as far as my role with the department, that will be up to the secretary, and i take he is looking at getting that report in before we can discuss it, so i have no idea how long that would take, but it does not believe i will not be speaking out. i have had many requests from people who want to hear from me. i would like to hear about efforts being made in communities that are dealing

with racism and discrimination. i would like to highlight them. i know there are people who are working on the issues. i think we need to hear those stories as we move forward. that is what this country needs. there are people who care. we're hearing too much from people who want to point out the negative, and i want to point out the positive. >> what were the exact positions and the duties there, and were you tempted to take it? >> i was tempted to take it. the secretary can speak more to its then i can at this point.

i was tempted. >> the office was created by congress to do work that needs to be done in making sure people appreciate what programs the usda offers and how to access them. there are a lot of people who have no idea how lebron the scope of the department is, -- how broad the scope of the department is commo, and they ae often overwhelmed by the complexity of federal bureaucracy they can work through. the idea of working with the civil rights office was to do a better job integrating and making sure they have access to the programs, because there are probably companies that have not accessed usda programs, which is the reason we have created them.

surely would have overseen that effort to make sure we are penetrating. i think she will be able to also do that would be able to focus more of her time and dig deeper than she would of region would have if she had administrative responsibility. >> can you tell us who it was? >> i did not speak to anyone at the white house. as i said earlier, this is my responsibility i continue to take full responsibility for it. i pride myself on the work i do, and i know i disappointed

the president. i disappointed the country. i disappointed surely. -- shirley. i have to live with that. my only hope is despite the challenges we have seen, maybe this is an opportunity for the country to have the opportunity she thinks we ought to have. maybe this will put a spotlight on the efforts the usda is making in the area of civil rights for almost 30 years, is trying to reopen access and review previous years. is trying to make our work force

modernize and diverse, and is trying to work to get the programs to the people most in need. if we are going to make anything out of this, that is what i have to do, and that is what i am committed to doing. i am serious about this. i came in trading to close the chapter of civil rights that has been difficult. we want to create a new chapter. this has given us an opportunity. i am happy to do that if we get the message out. >> a few weeks ago, you said you were going to sue the blocker -- blogger.

what is the status of that? >> i do not want to discuss that right now i do think the suit will be forthcoming, but i do not want to discuss that. >> using that wraps it up? >> tomorrow morning, we looked at the economy and home sales, and the president of the american federation of futures discusses the u.s. education system as children across the country return to school. after that, we talk about the use of unmanned aerial vehicles in afghanistan also, the conference on threats to homeland security. we will talk about the role the

private sector can play. >> this weekend on booktv, saturday, we looking at the aftermath of hurricane katrina, and he argues business and faith-based organizations are better handled to deal with disasters. we have a critical view of the lead back -- glenn beck. for a complete listing, visit for a complete listing, visit booktv.org. booktv.org. >> earlier today, john boehner >> earlier today, john boehner called on obama to fire his economic team. economic team. he also talked about small he also talked about small businesses, immigration, and the proposed construction of a

proposed construction of a mosque near ground zero. he spoke for nearly an hour. he spoke for nearly an hour. >> i want to thank you all who came to take part in the >> i want to thank you all who discussion. discussion. i know this is the beginning of i know this is the beginning of another long day for you, trying another long day for you, trying to make decisions without knowing what the next day will bring. bring. i'm not floras, did the dishes, i'm not floras, did the dishes, and i watched people agonize i watched people agonize over the same kind of decisions i had to make them myself when i was running a small business.

i talked to employers who were i talked to employers who were trying to keep the people they have on the payroll. have on the payroll. they do not stop to think about they do not stop to think about how the employees are like members of a family. members of a family. these are bonds that cannot be measured. measured. they have been affected by a struggling economy. struggling economy. they're afraid to invest in any they're afraid to invest in any economy stalled by uncertainty, by uncertainty, and the prospect of higher prospect of higher taxes , stricter rules, more , stricter rules, more regulations, has employers

sitting on their hands. sitting on their hands. who can blame them? who can blame them? employers are scared to death. i conveyed my belief this is employers are scared to death. i conveyed my belief this is ongoing. ongoing. not long after we spoke, he signed a $26 billion stimulus

signed a $26 billion stimulus bill that throws money from states to protect government states to protect government jobs. jobs. this would make it more this would make it more expensive to create jobs here in expensive to create jobs here in the united states and less united states and less expensive to create jobs create jobs overseas. overseas. this cannot continue. continue. i have had enough of politicians have had enough of politicians talking about wanting to create talking about wanting to create jobs as a ploy to get themselves to get themselves reelected while doing everything reelected while doing everything possible to prevent jobs from possible to prevent jobs from being created in our country. i am going to propose five i am going to propose five factions president obama should obama should take immediately to help more take immediately to help more americans find an honest day's find an honest day's work. work. first, the president should first, the president should announce he will not carry out his plan to propose job killing his plan to propose job killing tax hikes on families and small businesses. businesses. unless congress acts, virtually unless congress acts, virtually all americans will see it their

taxes go up. this puts government in a this puts government in a position of picking winners and winners and losers and fitting -- putting losers and fitting -- putting taxpayers against taxpayers. against taxpayers. according to the official according to the official scorekeeper, half of small scorekeeper, half of small business income in america would face higher taxes. face higher taxes. only in washington would it be acceptable that taxpayers would acceptable that taxpayers would have to pay for the privilege of pay for the privilege of keeping more hard-earned money keeping more hard-earned money one of obama's predecessors once

said, an economy constrained by said, an economy constrained by high tax rates will never create enough revenue to balance the budget just as it will never create more jobs. create more jobs. the president was john f. kennedy. kennedy. let me be clear this is a recipe for disaster. for disaster. president obama should work with president obama should work with republicans, and we should do it republicans, and we should do it quickly. president obama should announce president obama should announce he will veto any job killing bills sent to his desk by a lame-duck congress, including

any other tax increases on any other tax increases on families and small businesses. the bill remains in the united the bill remains in the united states senate. this plan will raise our utility costs. costs. the national energy tax has the potential to vote impact firms potential to vote impact firms that are barely hanging on. are barely hanging on. this bill is a top priority for this bill is a top priority for those that will provide money and eliminate a worker's right in union elections, making it easy to organize.

this is essentially a how to this is essentially a how to take -- a how-to guide. -- a how-to guide. when i ask the president last when i ask the president last month, he accused me of scare tactics. tactics. they looked at me like i did not know what i was talking about. know what i was talking about. the president said he would keep fighting. keep fighting. democratic leaders refused to democratic leaders refused to rule out the possibility of a possibility of a lame-duck session after the voters have had their say. voters have had their say. their failure to level with the american people only compound the economic uncertainty. the economic uncertainty. president obama should announce that he will veto the bills, and i pledge republicans will work i pledge republicans will work with him to sustain the veto. with him to sustain the veto. the president should call on

the president should call on democratic leaders to stop leaders to stop instructing republicans to instructing republicans to repeal the new 1099 mandate. the government takeover of health care is already wreaking health care is already wreaking havoc on employers. this created 160 more bureaucracy and commissions, and bureaucracy and commissions, and by the end of july, washington of july, washington already racked up more than 3833 than 3833 pages to implement. implement. one of the most controversial mandate requires small mandate requires small businesses to report any total purpose that would run more than $600. $600. our restaurant needs a new ice maker. maker. they have to report that. have to report that. if you are a mom and pop grocery

store and you have to buy from store and you have to buy from 15 different vendors, you have different vendors, you have to file 15 different forms. what is the point of making them what is the point of making them comply? comply? if you want to talk about if you want to talk about overhead, last month republicans overhead, last month republicans intended to repeal the mandate. to repeal the mandate. democrats intended to use this democrats intended to use this as an opportunity to impose another job killing tax on job creators. creators. president obama called on president obama called on congress today to repeal this congress today to repeal this without delay and without strings attached. strings attached. fourth, an aggressive spending reduction package. reduction package. we should force washington to

force washington to cut non-defense discretionary spending to 2008 levels. this would signal washington is this would signal washington is ready to get serious about bringing down the deficits that threaten our economy. threaten our economy. president obama thinks we should president obama thinks we should talk about it next year i say we about it next year i say we talk about it right now it comes about it right now it comes from somewhere. from somewhere. we are now five -- borrowing 41 we are now five -- borrowing 41 cents of every dollar we spend we spend on our kids or grandkids. on our kids or grandkids. this spring, when power changed this spring, when power changed hands in britain, one treasurer hands in britain, one treasurer left a note for his successor. it said, i am afraid to tell you

there is no money left. there is no money left. we are broke. we are broke. our debt is on track to exceed the entire size of our economy. the entire size of our economy. congress did not even write a budget this year. budget this year. they just cancelled if pierre roid of washington will try to roid of washington will try to get away with continuing to continuing to spend at current levels. this runs the risk of a this runs the risk of a damaging spike in interest rates spike in interest rates to reagan -- interest rates. they do not have the courage to they do not have the courage to say no.

republicans are ready to work to take this first step. take this first step. they're frustrated by the fact they're frustrated by the fact that no one is listening to them. them. part of the reason is no one has part of the reason is no one has created jobs in the private sector. sector. american people are asking, where are the jobs? where are the jobs? the worse things get, they continue to defend the

indefensible. indefensible. already, they have moved on. already, they have moved on. president obama should accept president obama should accept the resignations of the of the remaining members of his team. members of his team. this is no substitute for a this is no substitute for a referendum on the job killing the agenda. the agenda. that will be put before the put before the american people into time. people into time. we tried for 19 months of we tried for 19 months of government and community organizing, and it has not worked. worked. our fresh start needs to begin now. i would like to talk about how i would like to talk about how we begin the fresh start we

need. need. they want to give taxpayers, they want to give taxpayers, families, and small-business owners a direct line to their representatives. representatives. americans are sharing their solutions for a more responsible government and a better country. government and a better country. all you have to do is log on, all you have to do is log on, post an idea of your own, or post an idea of your own, or even vote on someone else's. even vote on someone else's. this will result in a clear and this will result in a clear and positive agenda that focused on agenda that focused on getting people back to work people back to work again, and because jobs is the issue, where are the jobs is the issue, where are the jobs is the question i hear all the time. question i hear all the time. this would help families this would help families realize the american dream.

it certainly will not be based on the idea that sitting in on the idea that sitting in washington, cutting back on deals represents something like hope. hope. we are building from the ground up by listening. up by listening. i've discussed what we are up i've discussed what we are up against in terms of the terms of the immediate uncertainty, and washington is gripped by a more washington is gripped by a more entrenched uncertainty. entrenched uncertainty. i have said if i were in the -- i have said if i were in the -- fortunate enough to be speaker

to be speaker of the house, i would run the house differently. house differently. i mean differently than i mean differently than democrats or republicans in the past. past. look at spending. look at spending. we do not need to just stop spending so much. spending so much. we need to stop spending so irrationally. irrationally. each dollar is taken directly

is taken directly out of the private sector. of the private sector. deficits spending always comes due. we see this in washington all we see this in washington all the time when politicians take time when politicians take victory laps. these benefits are held up as a jobs plan, a stimulus for the economy. economy. many agree it was not a

responsible jobs program. responsible jobs program. they know when the bill comes through, it was their pocket they will come through. they will come through. we need to have an honest we need to have an honest conversation about the scope of about the scope of our fiscal challenges. they are failing to rein in they are failing to rein in these debts. these debts. that is our fault. that is our fault. we need to ask ourselves, is it we need to ask ourselves, is it right to force our kids and right to force our kids and grandkids to pay for this? grandkids to pay for this? just as we reevaluate how they just as we reevaluate how they spend money, we should evaluate

how they collect money. how they collect money. the spending will always continue. continue. congress usually house must do congress usually house must do tax policies from one year to the next. the next. -- usually has a must to tax policy from one year to the

next. next. this has 71 separate tax provisions in it. provisions in it. more provisions get added each and every year. and every year. few if any seem to fall out. are they worth it? are they worth it? many of them are.

we need to look of the we need to look of the undergrowth of deductions, credits that it has become. what they sometimes called what they sometimes called poorly disguised spending poorly disguised spending programs will have role in programs will have role in business and employers. by trying to build a recovery by trying to build a recovery on government spending policy government spending policy and failing, the public sector has had of boom. has had of boom. the private sector has lost the private sector has lost millions of jobs. millions of jobs. federal employees make more on federal employees make more on average than double what they

are paid. are paid. this more than doubled in this more than doubled in president obama's time in obama's time in office during a time private- during a time private- sector workers lost their job or sector workers lost their job or took a pay cut to keep the job they had. they had. they have 199 rules and they have 199 rules and regulations that could cost $100 million or more. million or more. that is 191 new layers of red tape. tape. they have for the innovation and

investment. investment. small businesses cannot plan for the future. the future. we receive the response but we receive the response but still no details on what new regulations really are. regulations really are. the federal government should the federal government should not be able to issue these on a to issue these on a whim without proper scrutiny. without proper scrutiny. these were all part of a bloated washington. now more than ever we need a now more than ever we need a fresh start that puts power in start that puts power in the hands of the american

people. people. they say, just get out of the way. republicans have already republicans have already identified 1.3 trillion dollars identified 1.3 trillion dollars in specific spending that could spending that could be implemented immediately. implemented immediately. these included the tarp bailouts. bailouts. if we reduce spending and if we reduce spending and imposed a hard cap, we can save cap, we can save taxpayers more than $340 taxpayers more than $340 billion, and we can make sure billion, and we can make sure this is the last washington is the last washington spending spree of its time. time. instead of growing big

government, let's focus on government, let's focus on growing small businesses. growing small businesses. last month, republican lawmakers met with some of the employer met with some of the employer community to hear their concerns and talk about ways to end and talk about ways to end economic uncertainty. economic uncertainty. one idea that was mentioned was idea that was mentioned was a freeze on job killing regulations. regulations. they're fighting for legislation that will require congressional that will require congressional approval of any new rule that imposes a cost of more than $100 imposes a cost of more than $100 million in our nation's economy. our nation's economy. i think this will serve as a much-needed restraining order against bureaucrats.

president reagan said there ought to be of law. ought to be of law. it is not enough to hope the pendulum swings the other way. they are asking them to take a they are asking them to take a deduction of 20% of their income. income. they look for what they continue they look for what they continue to think is going to be a better solution. solution. congress has yet to act on the congress has yet to act on the pending trade agreements with

trade agreements with colombia, panama, and south korean. korean. these level the field, creating these level the field, creating hundreds of thousands of new thousands of new jobs right here at home. we presented to the president last december. last december. congress should approve these immediately. the best i can make of these is that they work. that they work. some of them are working now. some of them are working now. this will bring legislators together to bring about better together to bring about better solutions to the everyday challenges. challenges. let's look at what they have let's look at what they have been able to accomplish.

in virginia, they face a $4.2 billion deficit. billion deficit. his predecessor proposed his predecessor proposed imposing the largest tax imposing the largest tax increase in the state history. they refuse to balance the state they refuse to balance the state budget by making it harder to harder to balance their own budgets. in new jersey, chris chris in new jersey, chris chris defaced and $11 billion -- chris chris defaced and $11 billion deficit. . .

release of the report from the department of defen task force on the prevention of suicide by members of the armed forces. as you are a well aware, t number and rate of suicide by service members across dod have increased significantly each year over the last several years. frankly speaking, having any of our nation's warriors dieby suice is not acceptable. not now, not ever. suicide is preventable and this report is intended to improve

upon the hard work of each of the military services. the opportunity is here and there is great hope that we can not only prevent suicide and save lives, but further strengthen the force in doing so. i am major-general phil volpe, united states army, military co- chair on the dod task force, along with ms. bonnie carroll, who was also the president and .ational director of taps, th ghanian i have had the distinct honor of serving as cochairs alongside many of the distinguished members of our task force. most are prent, but if you were not able to make it today. in a few minutes -- in a w minutes, i will have each of the members introduce themselves. why are we here? as directed by congressional

mandate in section 733 national defense authorization act for fiscal year 2009, the secretary has a dovish a task force to examine matters related to -- to establish a task force to examine matters related to the prevention of suide in the military force. the task force is made up of 1 ofessionals who have done research in the field of suicide prevention, clinical care and mental health, military chaplaincy and pastoral care, and military families. additionally, the task force had reckoned -- representation from each of the military branches, army, navy, air force and marine corps. the task was established in august of 2009, one yea ago, and today, submitted to the secretary of defense detail in the research and results and recommendations from a year-long review of data, studies,

programs and discussions with service members, their families, and caregivers. the intent of this board is through the day -- to the secretary of defense for actionable measures and policies and programs designed to prevent suicide. the task used by the main data. presentations from saddam matter experts, public participation -- from the subject matter experts, public participation, panel participation, and cut information gathered on eyes on a field visit. the task force concluded that current service benefits would benefit from a comprehensive

strategy cordoba throughout the department of defense. we arrived at 49 findings and 76 associated recommendations, which are discussed in detail in the full report and a complete list of the recommendations are found in theharts in the last few pages of your executive summary. the 76 recommendations roll into four primary focus areas. organization and leadehip, wellness and and and and training, access to and delivery of quality care, and finally, surveillance, investigations, and research. the 49 findings and 79 associated recommendations are divided up among these focus areas. the task force also provided a set of foundational recommendations that aggregate several of the targeted recommendations which the task force believes our critical in preventing suicide. the foundational recommendations are also listed in the executive

summary on page es-9. at this time i would like to have the members of the task force present today introduce themselves, beginning in my right, dore left, starting with dr. jobs. >> dr. david jobs at the catholic univ. of america in washington d.c. my research focuses on primarily in the assessment and treatment of a suicidal individuals. i have been a consultant to the dod, veterans affrs, and i have worked as a consultant across the branches of the army, navy, r force and marines. i'm a clinical psychologist and i am in practice here at the washington psychological center here in washington. >> good afternoon. i am chief master sgt jeff seb relczik.

i have 20 + years in the air force with a background in resource personnel. >> i am robert stain. i am in the episcopal priest. chaplin. is a retired javeli it covers part of my career was a b-52 navigator and had over 100 combat missions in vietnam and was a prisoner of war. >> good afternoon, john preppy. i have been involved -- i am john bradley. i've been involved in clinical care for the past 26 years. carroll, an army

surviving spouse. i am therefore is reserve officer. my career has included chief of casualty operations, headquarters in an states air force. by and former white house liaison to the departmenof veterans affairs and i directly, tragedy assistance program for survivors -- i direct a the tragedy assistance program for survivors. we have over 1000 family members who have lost a loved one to suicide. >> hello, i'm david lift, director of the national science policy, which is the funded technical assistance center for the development of the strategy of suicide prevention. i am also in medical service -- a retired medical service officer. i helped write the national

strategy for suicide prevention, which was released in this room nine and a half years ago. >> i am an infantry unit leader and adviser to these as a prevention program. by 29 years of service in the marine corps. -- to the suicide prevention program. i have 29 years of service in the marine corps. >> for the last 15 years i've served as the executive director of suicidology here in washington. >> good afternoon. i am the va national program director for suiciderevention and in that role, manage and supervise all of our suicide prevention coordinators across the country. by mt of the program manager for the suicide v.a. hot line -- i am also the program manager

for the suicide va hot line. >> i major general phil volpe, currently the commanding general of the western regional medical command. i am a career soldier, a practicing physician by trade, and i've had the distinct privilege and honor of serving alongside them bravest men and women serving in the uniform in the army, navy, air force and marine corps. to create a set of strategy and recommendations that are useful and obtainable, the task force developed six guiding principle as we conduct our work off throughout the year. the first is a suicide and suicidal beaters are preventable. second, suicide prevention begins with leadership and requires an engagement in all facets of the military committee. third, a suicide prevention requires long-term sustained commitment using a

comprehensive, public health approach. fourth, service members wl as and fitness, total fitness -- mind, body and spirit -- is essential to mission accomplished an and suicide prevention. fifth, recommendations of the task force should reflect the best available practices and sign to the government as well as the expert consensus -- and scientific evidence as well as expert consensus. and sixth, the recommendation should be consistent with the culture of the armed forces and catalyze on the strength of the armed forces. the title of our report is "the challenge and a promise: strengthening the force, preventing suicide and saving lives." while there is still much not understood about suicide and suicidal behavior and effective approaches to prevent it, in the collective wisdom of this task force, the four cus areas already mentioned constitutes of what we consider a comprehensive

suicide prevention strategy. they're not only considered lines of defense in suicide prevention, but they inform and build on one another and cover the entire range of activities. those focus areas, as you can see, are listed on this chart over here. i mentioned already, organization and leadership. it is important to be organized for success and leaders must be involved at every level. well this enhancement and training -- wellness enhancement and training, the pinnacle of primary prevention is and well- being, or fitness. and training is key. training needs to be accomplished throughout the force, not only with service members and families, but also with personnel. another is access to end delivery of quality of health care.

while health care, and behavioral wild carrot -- health care is an important component for the strategies, we need to keep that in mind d maksure that people have access to that quality care and thats comprehensive and communicated and coordinated amongst the various interventions services that we have. and finally, surveillance, investigation and research -- obviously, any public health approach needs to have a solid grounding in surveillance, a unity of effort in servin is to inrm suicide prevention programs in the future when -- the unity of effort in surveillance to inform souza prevention programs in the future. suicide is extremely complex with a multiple rehr with -- array of was factors and prevention factors. there is no single solution.

suicide prevention programs must be multidimensional in their approach and work to decrease risk factors while simultaneously increase productive factors. these multifaceted solutions, as contained in the task force recommendations, the 76 recommendations, are intended to achieve the taskforce reason -- a vision. a military force, fit in mind, body and spirit, tt can destinations call. at this time, like to introduce ms. bonnie carroll -- to ask ms. bonnie carroll to the podium and she will list mortar board recommendations and then we will open it up to questions. >> a nation reveals itself not only by the men it produces, but also by the men and honors -- it

honors, the men id remembers. those were the words of president john f. kennedy and they echo here today. general build troy, then commander of the army in alaska, spoke about this honor and courage, when you do a memorial service in a different way for a suicide victim, i think you are adding to the stigmatization of a sold through have a behavioral health problem. you do not mean to, but -- of a soldier who had a behavioral healthroblem. if you do not need to, but you are making it look like it's his fault. we should be memorializing his service to the nationhis service in combat. he is a volunteer, a member of a free nation that came forward and join our ranks to defend this country and that is what we should b memorializing, not passing judgment on the manner of his death. the tide is turning.

leaders are listening. stigma is fading. the military has led the way to eliminating racial discrimination and sexual harassment. in the military -- and the military we saw over the past year is dedicated to strengthening the for, preventing suicide and saving lives. the foundational recommendations of the report are critically important to the success of developing a comprehensive department of defense suicide prevention model. the task force saw best practices in each of the services and recognize the urgent need to share these success stories across the service lines. a primary recommendation is to create a suicide prevention policy division within the office of the secretary of defense. to standardize policies and reece -- and procedures with

respect t resiliency, mental fitness, life skills, and suicide prevention. the office will provide standardization, integration of best practices, and general oversight, served as a change agent and established an ongoing external reviegroup of non-dot group experts to assess -- of a non-dod experts to assess progress. we see success when leaders take charge. a key recommendation of the task force is to keep suicide prevention programs with leadership and will leaders accountable at every level for insuring a positive command climate that promotes the well- being, aotal fitness, and health of their servi members.

a significant focus on better tools to assist in suicide prevention must be undertaken. it is as though the essential that efforts are focused on this being,e member's well- total mind, body and spirit, and increase productive factors and a decreased risk factors. this is the pinnacle of primary prevention. we must reduce the stress on the force bynsuring the quality and quantity of the well time as the force is reconstituted over and over again. this will allow service members to reestablish relationships and find connected this. stigma kills and caring leadership saved lives. it isital that the armed

forces develop a comprehensive stigma reduction campaign that attacks the issue on multiple fronts to encourage health seeking behavior and normalize the care of the hidden wounds incurred by service members. during our site visits we've repeatedly heard from service members who told us they had almost died from borden, listening to yet another suicide prevention -- from boredom, listening to get another suicide prevention briefing. they felt this was done more to fulfill a requirement and to give them the tools they need. we must develop skills based training for suicide prevention, especially among buddies, family members, first time line supervisors, clergy and behavioral health personnel. those on the front line who recognize a service member in distress.

community health and access to quality, competence and services are essential to suicide prevention. we recommend that the services coordinator and leverage the strength of installation and local community support services for both active and reserve component service members. maintaining wellness and mental fitness is vital to suicide evention. military life, particularly in wartime is inherently stressful on individuals and presents a unique challenge to maintaining wellness. physical, psychological, spiritual, family, social, financial, vocational, and emotnal well-being are

protected factors against suicide. -- protective factors against suicide. our comprehensive approach will mitigate risk factors and at e same time enhancing productive factors. therefore, dod and its services must support programs that strengthen these protecte factors, including resilience, total fitness, connected this -- connectedness, sense of purpose, loving relationships, stable environment, and leaders of the respect and values its troops. -- leadership that respects and values its troops. when indiduals exhibits signs of suicidal behaviors everyone

around them must be quick to recognize their stress and ensure their referral to deeper prevention services. peers, as first-line supervisors, and especially the members must be trained to recognize suicidal behavior is and know how to get the person to the appropriate intervention services. we must ensure continuity and management o quality behavioral health care, especially while in betweenon periods duties. the key to understanding suicide is to go below the surface, far below the snowflakes on the iceberg, which a soldier wrote about on his journal just before he ended his

life standardize a suicide investigation and expand thr focus to look at the last days, the last weeks, the last two years preceding a suicide or attempted suicide. patterned it suicide to -- pattern suicide investigations on aviation accident investigations and use that as a model to standardize suicide investigation protocol. considerable effort has been expeed by dod, numerous individuals across the world in support of service members across the world - are of service members and their families. it is to enhance the work already being done to insure and already fit and ready force for meeting the demand of serving in the military. it is our belief that

implementation of the task force recmendations and strategic initiatives will save lives and further propel the dod as a national leader in suicide prevention. abraham lincoln brought him into a nation in the midst of our country's civil war with these words, "with malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as god gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for he who shall have borne the battle and his widow and his orphan, to do all which may cherished and achieve a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all natns."

and this is our challenge and our promise, to care for him w shall have borne the battle by strengthening the force, saving lives and preventing suicides. thank you. >> thanks, bonnie. at ts time, let's open it up to questions. >> thank you. paul corston from cnn. witnessing today suicide problem from the result of prolonged wartime past -- we have been long wars in the past, and yet, the problem of suicide only just now seems to come to the attention of task forces like these. what has changed?

>> i think along the topic, i mean, first off, it ery difficult to compare today with yesterday because, quite frankly, the data was not collected a lot in the past on previous conflicts or in their aftermath on service members. there is not a lot of comparing and contrasting that can be done because data is deficient. data focusing on a lot of now in this current conflict because it is recognized that this is a particular issue and challenge throughout the department of defense and we see it in the rising number of rates of suicide by service members. our report focuses specifically on this particular problem at this particular time and particularly, the rising rate and number. did any of the members want to have to that?

>> one of the things that has changed is just like with prophetic -- prosthetics and other medical of vances, there are a lot -- there is a lot more awareness than in vietnam or korea or world war ii. there's a lot more understanng of how to approach a suicide prevention. much of the attention, i believe, is it because we are in a different place today than we were at the end of world war ii, or korea or vietnam. >> [inaudible] inyes, i flew b-52's vietnam. >> [inaudible] >> is different. if vietnam, as i recall, was ju about as long as the double, we have been in ladley. the obstacle he -- the services

became very intense about not only collecting of data and defining data, but also a suicide prevention in the 1990's. for about 10 years they have been doing a tremendous amount of research and investigation anprevention work that had not been true in previous eras. >> i would like to know, do you already have all the facts to understand what are the main situations where the soldier had taken their lives, for example, the average age if they are in

the theater or when they come back, if they are married or single, if they have experience. do you even know what is causing this problem? >> the armed services have been quite good and thorough in collecting that sort of data that we would describe as an epidemiological data. we knoa lot about the age, marital status, gender obviously, rank. one of the recommendations in the report is to better understand of the demographics, but the dynamic nature of suicide and the fateh -- and particularly the pathways that lead in individual that is reasonably functional of one. down a path toward suicide.

-- who is reasonably functional at one. down a path toward suicide. the focus that we think is most important is move from degraphics to a dynamic understanding ofhe suicidal individual. >> to add to that, i think it is also important -- because this goes down the line of your -- we cannot really develop a profile of a person at risk. it is very complex and the risk faors and causal relationships are extremely complex and very individualized in very -- in each suicide case and in each case where someone risks suicidal behavior. it is therefore important that we have a collection of multiple

programs that attack this from all different avenues, from prevention to early identification and intervention and altering behavior to strategic messaging to leadership involvement so that no one will fall through the cracks. there is a basket there and someone to catch the individual. it is extremely complex, no simple solion. >> [inaudible] there are some manifestations or maybe some symptoms that could allow you to detect a person about to commit suicide. is that possible? >> i'm not sure if a member is able to answer that. again, if you look at the chart

on risk factors, any of those respecters which will supply or occurred in any order. a lot of them all of one's will increase the risk for suicide. and this is true because the culture. the big ones are failed relationships, overwhelming fincial indebtedness, and the legal problems. you mix that with a little alcohol and you have a deadly mix. not everyone is going to resort to suicide with that same mix, but those are the major risk factors here on this chart over here. part of what we are recommending is to try to moderate those risk factors across the board for everybody and to increase the productive factors onhe right-hand side of this chart. -- protective factors on the right-hand side of this chart. >> tom fitzgerald from fox

television. in the focus area, it in this report you refer to the discriminating and humiliating treatment of service members who sought help for psychological problems. could you expand on that and tell us what environment you found in regards to attitudes toward members who sought out psychological treatment? also, is one branch of the armed forces more susceptible than others? and in your looking at the different services that each individual branch created, is one branch doing a better job than the other branches? >> during our site visits, we saw examples of and we're in were told of examples of humiliating behavior and rosset will of many examples of exemplary leadership.

we visited installations across all of the services and heard similar stories across all of the services. the really, what it boils down to his unit lears. some are very effective and mature and support their troops and others might not necessarily have the skills to support their troops as well as others. that being said, i think leaders through the ongoing efforts across the dod to raise suicide prevention awareness, reshape the fourth, a decrease sigma are really getting the -- decrease the stigma, are really getting the message of how to take care of them effectively. >> they are getting the message now, but what was going on? >> we heard several stories of humiliatin type behavior in ranks formations where single --

soldiers were singled out and identified as someone who was suicidal, publicly ridiculed, things along that nature. we saw other attempts to provide a safety net for service members by bringing them under the wayne of the command structure -- under the wing of the command structure and charging them with the cq desk where they are under the watchful eye of officers, but unwittingly identified as someone who is suidal. more needs to be done. >> there are many cases were saves are being done every day and leaders make a difference in saving lives. we haveheard stories about that

over and over, but they're clearly also is the occasional leader that has a negative command climate that has to the stigma and/or will prevent the individual from seeking help. we have seen cases like that. i do not think it is any different than what you would find out of the world in general in any organization or institution, but it is out there. those leaders need to be held accountable for that. it is mostly at the first line, frontline, supervisory level leadership that we are talking about. the bigger part of that, those that have a negative command client -- climate unknowingly because we are asking some very young noncommissioned officers and officers to now lead to other people, really, for the first time in their lives. the question that we have to ask ourselves -- are we giving them the skills to manage and take

care of the whole person? are we giving young, noncommissioned officers and officers the skills on how to deal with a relationship problem when one of their people in their charge has a relationship problem? are we teaching them how to deal with a financial problem? are we teaching them how to deal with a situation where a service member, be it a soldier, sailor, airman or marine, isn't quite fitting in with the rest of the team. how do you approach that as a leader and make him feel valued and respected and included as part of the team? and noture that we are teaching the skills to all of these young leaders and by default, that creates a climate that makes these particular service members more susceptible for suicidal behavior. yes, sir? >> my name is carl osgood. i write for executive intelligence review. i would say that st of these

instances in relation to military service after those individuals leave this service. i realize your recommendations are aimed at dod, but i'm wondering if they might have a positive long-term effect after people leave the service. for example, there are vietnam veterans dealing with ptsd 40 to 45 years after their dramatic experiences. i wonder if you could talk about that as well. >> i'm gladou asked that. the v. was very fortunate to be a part of this task force, not only from a perspective where hopefully we were able to contribute we have learned and the lessons that we have learned over the past several years in dealing with suicide, but also to absorb some of the needs and changes that we see coming. if we look forward to partnering

with the dot in the implementation of some of these recommendations, to really learn from people's experiences in the department of defense, and to carry some of this new and exciting training and their opportunities -- training and opportunities into this. is a good program and we are excited to be part of that. >> developing cultural values that support held seeking, that support the pursuit of mental and psychological fitness, but also helps support training people in these skills, prevention skills. all of these things will cry with them when they leave the service into the civilian community. we certainly think this should have affect outside the military, and actually, even in the communities as people go

back to their civilian communities. >> my name is steve robinson. i made better and advocates -- i am a veteran advocate and former service member. first, thank you for the report. it is refreshing to see that the complete picture of suicide prevention is being addressed, which includes looking at us as leaders in the military and how we play a role. thank you for that. i'm wondering if it's time for the panel of experts to ask themselves if the word stigma is too soft a word and we ought to start calling ino flat out discrimination for mental health issues. it would be the same as someone hit with a roadside bomb and had no legs on the side of the road to abandoning someone with a mental health care injury. i'm wondering if the word stigma is too soft.

perhaps it is discrimination in its highest form. >> one of the problems with the word stigma is that if envelops several different concepts, so when you use the word, no one is really sure what you mean. but also, every time we say the word stigma, we are reinforcing that there is a bunch of stigma there and it is a big problem. i think we agree completely that we should tease this apart. sometimes it is prejudiced, sometimes it is discrimination. sometimes it is self discrimination. in talking about these things we need to talk about exactly what we need in -- and mean in this context and then we will be able to address the core issues involved. >> and that is the reason why an are foundational recommendations, we recommended a campaign plan that addresses and teases thispart, takes a strategic approach to tackling

all of the types of the stigma. but i do want to make something very important, of that we recognize that these services are doing something very important. soldiers today have thof your health care needs for whatever reasons, and because of that stigma, we create anonymous sources for them to get care because it is importt for them to get care. we need to be sure that the stigma is not so great that they are not going to get care so that we have to overcome it. but at the same time, we have to reduce sigma over time in order to move. -- reduce the stigma of overtime in order to move into behavioral health care. it is okay to ca behavioral health person. you could be the strongest warrior in the world and you are still human. you still have challenges and

ups and downs. the messages that need to go up our that while you are resilient and a top warrior, you may need some additional services and interventions at different times. there is plenty available. it is okay to seek those services, and guess what, they work when you do see them. that needs to be the message that goes out in these strategic communications at the same time as that -- as tackling the stigma for the future. >> and carol pearson. i'm with the voice of america. since theres no profile of a person likely to continue -- to comm suicide, did i understand that right? would you rule out recruits that maybe had a history of depression or took lexipro or

something like that? people in you rule out t the armed services who might be at risk of committing -- of committing suicide? and how would you look at the service members who may be on anti-depressant drugs or into anxiety? how would you assess their mental health call-in not just their needs, but the mental health situation? -- not just their mental health, and not just their need, but the mental health situation? >> there is a lackf coordination among various services and individuals who would identify risks, higher risks in individuals. when someone sees the real health care, that is one stowe

bought. community services, our call and is the absence of use -- all call and substance abuse programs. first of all, the communication and coordination across so the leaders have a common operating picture of what is going on with their service members and they can identify who is at risk and who is nad. right now, that information is not shared as well as we would like it to be. this is particularly important in transitions when people are eager deploying or redeploying for changing station, moving to another installation, were being released from active duty and going to the civilian world. there is a loss of those prective factors during the time -- during that time and there is not a lot of ovsight. one of the things we have to do is effectively manage

transitions in order to make sure that people are covered during those transitions, which appeared to be a vulnerable time for suicidal behavior. the other answer to your question is, there are tools out there and currenresearch going on on a lot of these tools. and in our report we talk about a lot of that research going on. but this is clearly an area where there are some knowledge gaps and the onlwe can close ose knowledge gaps and identify better tools for the high-risk individuals, because there is no one set profile for identifying someone at risk is through ongoing research, screening tools and those types of things. anyone else? >> i think, too, it is important to recognize that there are different types of risk factors.

there are risk factors that we referred to as predisposing risk factors and they have to do with things we can i do anything about -- age, gender, all sorts of things. there are other risk factors that are more precipitating risk factors, more situational. those are the ones that we really can make an effort to identify and change. you have heard some of those already today. people who are having severe financial difculties, severe relationship issues, perhaps some problems with substance use and ase. of all of those things -- all of those things would affect someone who has predisposing factors already in play. paying attention to those situations and really working hard to provide training programs to offer those -- alter

those, to change someone's response in these stressful situations will go along way in helping people find these risk factors and build protective factors around them. and i think he will be in trouble if you start identifying people and putting labels on them. we will not only missed lots of people who are having trouble, but we might put the labels on the wrong people. paying attention to those precipitating issues is important and i think we talked about that in the report. >> let me just add one other area that i was speaking to befo speaks to acute risk factors. those observable beaters, symptoms, signs, cues that are displayed by the individual in the last 30 days to one week of their life. we now know a lot about what

describes individuals in the armed services who died by suicide, we know practicay nothing about those last 30 days, which is the window of opportunity for intervention, for years to observe, r referrals t be made, obviously country and to be instituted. that is the area where we most need to understand -- obviously, treatment to be instituted. that is the area where we need to most understand. outhouldn't we just screen people with health needs and reduce the risk that way either in our interest in screening or in the active forces, in answering that question, what we've learned in this task force is that the vast majority of a people who died by suide did not have a diagnose mental

illness or a diagnose behavioral health care. another thing that we know and was reinforced by the task force is that the vast majority of people who have behavioral health needs and are engaged in clinical care do not suffer suicide -- suicidal iation and do not commit suicide. the vast majority continued to get well and served in uniform. it is important for us to aware to be aware that taking care of the metal helmets -- the mental well as of the tros actually increases the total wellness. >> there's a lot more research

than we think there is. effective suicide treatments in a handful of states are very effective. we do not know a lot about how to effectively treaty. it seems amazing that we do not know. that bei said, and effective warrior may not necessarily translate into being an effective patient. that is something that we looked at with this task force. there is so much focus on mental fitness. if we can make mental fitness commensurate with physical fitness for warriors, then we can make a lotf progress. there is a cultural consideration inll of this. but the assumption that there must be obvious ways to handle this is not the case from the larger perspective. but there is no one doing more for suicide prevention then the dod and v.a. system. i can say that unequivocally. we are after it.

i think the military is in a position to take the lead not just for the military, but for the nation. >> with respect to -- it has long been felt that any request for mental health services because you have some mental health issues is a career stopper if you are career military. how do you address the perception, or how you change that? >> there is evidence that is not necessarily the case, but it is a common perception. in the air force program there has been data shown that when someone identifies and six mental-health treatment, a very small percentage had a career impact. but that is one of the challenges, that there are perceptions that need to change and this task report directly addresses those perceptions.

>> i think also, there are many of us in senior leadership positions that have sought mental health intvention in the past. we always talk about the tragedy of suicide and the loss of suicide and what are the actions the services are taking, you know, strategic and indications. but clearly, we need to change the conversation that seeking help is ok. there are plenty of resources out there. it is okay to seek them. it does not affect your caree and it helps. you get better. ther are plenty of examples out there of individuals who have had many successful careers who have sought services. on the same token, there are aspects of this -- i think many of you may have seen the natially televised talking

point by some of our medal of honor awardees who give the message, do not let the enemy defeated you at home. you are facing these enemies abroad all the time. there are some scholars that you bring back -- some scars that you bring back from deploymt, from services. do not let the enemy defeats you. there are services that it is okay to seek those. many say, i wish we have those resources after vietnam, or after the conflict they got back from. i think those services are very helpful, too. >> if we interpret mental heth care has something to take a deficit and return it up to normal. if we refrain that to a performance enhancement approach, i seek mental health

care, i go to the chaplain, i go seek some financial counseling all in the name of the improving my performance as a human being and as a soldier, sailor, mingan, marine, that refrainin will beg to tear down barriers as well. >> bar. with mcclatchy newspapers. you have all described a lot of the services that were put in place since the conflict began. and yet, looking at the statistics, the numbers almost at every year almost steadily continue to rise. where those numbers continuing to rise and when are we going to -- why are those numbers continuing to rise and when are we going to turthose are around? >> i think that is one of those situations where we do not have

enough data to answer the question. it is so complex. there are so many different things going on at the same time that i do not believe we draw a conclusion on that question in that -- in the report. >> any hope on when those numbers might start to a turnaround? >> we do not. in 2005, the department of defense, there were 189 suicides and the raid was about 11. something. it was the rate for 100,000. in 2009, there were 309 suicides in the department of defense and the rate is like 18.4%. it has clearly gone up since 2005 year after year. right now, we are seeing no

relief in the numbers in the current trend. but we believe there is a great opportunity to implement some recommendations that will change the face of what we're doing with suicide prevention, tackle lot of these risk factors that we are talking about that are below the level of suicidal behavior is, but obviously, just tackle in the well-being and wellness and life skills of the individual, resiliency, and balancing these risk factors with protective factors is key. again, it pays to be a comprehensive approach -- it needs to be a comprehensive approach. and leadership is involved at the strategic level tremendously in all of the services. we believe they are some optimized and could be further

enhanced -- sub-optimid and could be further enhanced. these offices are there to help standardize policy, standardized procedure, in order to achieve better surveillance. better surveillance means more information to modify a suicide prevention programs. that is what we need. we need a unity of effort in the department of defense to standardize policies and procedures, standardize surveillance, learn from everything we are doing, including all of these risk and productive factors, and leverage in these programs. we feel very confident that will make a difference in tackling therend and the rate you are describing. >> when we compare the military

population with the civilian population, being in the military has consistently been a protective factor. that is, this was the greatest -- the suicide rate is substantially lower in military than in civilian. when the rates started going up, we paid attention as sort of working with it. -- and started working with it. we cannot compare on a wee sing your basis with the civilian population -- on a recent year basis with the civilian population because it takes about two years to clect all of that data. the right now we are running about two years behind on civilian reporting. but still, at the last direct comparison, the military raid

was still lower than the same demographic among civilians. in talking to parishioners end others, it seems like it is much worse than in dealinwith their neighbors. that is simply not the case. but the military and employers are doing all began to coordinate and keep the rate as low as began. -- dahliwal de cantu chordata and keep the rate as low as we can. -- they are doing all they can to coordinate and keep the rate as low as we c. >> one of the initiatives is to reduce sess on the force and directional -- actionable recommendation is to decrease operations. i'm wondering if that is

realistic given the current wars. >> yes, we believe there needs to be reduced stress on the force. there needs to be a very high operational tempo. i cannot speak for we can speak on this particular one, and it is the feeling of the task force there is stress on the force. there is a significant amount of fatigue, fatigue among leaders. it really comes down to the amount of time we have to reset the person and apply all the time that is needed for better training, skills-based training, teaching life skills, taking care of the whole person. that time commitment seems to be narrowed down because of the operational commitments we have.

even those not deployed, they are going at a fairly rapid pace, too, and significant demands at our cans and installations. of reducing stress is important. we also believe there is some research, evidence that talks about dwell time to reset an individual. when we say we said an individual, when we talk about is a -- it is amazing how resilient as service members are. these men and women deployed over and over again and are taking onissions in service to our nation. that has tbe done. the same time, those repeated separations, the difculty of

putting your life on hold while you are deployed, knowing that you are going to deploy it again without having this reset level to some state of normalcy, it is critical to the long-term health and wellness of the force. the mental health advisory team -- the army has conducted six of those. we looked at the data from the meal health advisory teams and stuff, and they showed evidence for a year-long deployment, there needs to be 20 months to 24 months of 12 time. -- dwell time. we also have to be careful with that because it is not the quantity, but also the quality.

how do you recall to to the protective factors that are lost by some of the service members when they return? how do you reestablished good, strong, loving relatiohips? how do you get me connected again? this loss of connectedness with the people in your community, family, friends, has to be reestablished again for your long-term well-being. so the quality of that time to reestablish mazed connections is a very important. we believe there are things that can be internally done in the defense department, and we also believe strategic leaders of the nation need to look at the supply-demand of the force, and balance that out. clearly, there is a mismatch in the way the current force is operating, and that is creating stress on the force.

>> the difference between resilience and stress, that we are talking about here, if we can enhance resilience to reduce the stressors, then that prides additional protection against suicide and other things that happen that are not pleasant. all the work that the services are trying to do to build up strength, to enhance family life, strength and our troops, then we will have better protection. so the differential of stress and bad of resilience can be reduced, so we the military, can do our job without the effect of suicide. >> [inaudible]

from los anges. i haveeen speaking with hispanic soldiers that have pointed outhere are some cultural differences in hispanics, latinos, that makes it difficult for them to come back and adapt to their regular family life. i wonder if there was any part of the report that addressed these cultural challenges that hispanics or latinos have, and if race plays any significant role in the rate of suicide. >> i will let the members answer in the second, but the difficult part is we do not have good enough surveillance. that is why one of the recommendations is to maturity dot suicide prevent report -- dod suicide prevent report so that we can standardize the reporting and get into the

details on the impact of culture onto his side, particularly with service members. do not believe we have the data that sorts that out right now, with the current surveillant method. >> since some suicides take place after someone has left the military, is the military concerned about providing health? also, how easily is mental- health help it possible for someone who has left the military -- accessible for soone who has left the military? >> dod has been working relentlessly to run the war to improve transition times between

the time when people leave the military and enterhe community and are eligible for v.a. services. especially for this newer group of veterans, we are making hard to make that transition even before people leave the military, so there is a seamless transition into v.a. mental health services. that being said, one of the things that the report addresses as there are huge groupsf people who fall in between deployment and active duty and discharge. those are the people that we stress really need more attention. we need to concentrate on programs that reach out to those people, people in ready reserves, in the guard and

reserve groups, who are not in an active duty status at the current time. we have cited some best practices in the report of organizations doing a good job -- out and providing not reach -- providing outreach. >> well this is necessary in our country, at some cost, there are few people anywhere that are trained in suicide consultation. one the hero and his assumption that people make is that date -- hero aeneas -- erroneous assumptions that people make that is not the case.

down the road, long separated from the war, the number and on other issues, it is no longer just up to e department of defense. national car is a matter of national responsibility come as the current health care bill is trying to make -- responsibility, as the current health care bill is trying to make the point. someone becoming suicidal is not a normal part of our society, and that is a change that we need to make, beyond the dod and v.a. >> 10 years ago, dod and v.a.

did not court made in this way at all. it is just three said that they have they do inside joint -- a joint suicide conference. coordination in the last five years have been significant. the other piece that i would like to take with this idea is that we see on this task force suicide prevention should not be relegated under mental health. it should be across the board, across command, a solution that is multi-focal, n just a mental health issue. best practices need to be provided, but this is a much larger scope. this should not be housed exclusively under mental health, but should cut across each of our branches.

>> norway. do you know how big of a percentage of suicides you have reportedave been during deployment, while the person was in the army? what is the impact of suicide during deployment on the people close to the person who committed suicide? >> i think a good way to understand this is the rolof stories. as we looked at the data, one- third of the data that we completed happened to troops who were deployed in a theater of combat. one-third had a history of the plan went -- but were in their home station. the other third in troops that had never deployed. that is roughly howhe statistics break down with regard to suicide.

to eer the second part of the question, suicide -- >> to answer this -- to answer the second part of the question, suicide has an effect on everybody. but we do not have a good way to rencile that. there was some discussion in early on about the rituals involved in memorializing a death. if people are still struggling with how to recognize and greed in the face of suicide. it has a wide and profound effect on thsurvivors. >> and you deliver your recommendations -- a veteran advocate. as you deliver your recommendations, i have participated in other meetings and reviews, the freedom commission, other recommendations that have been

delivered. what will you do to ensure your remmendations are inculcated, what kind of commitment to you have from the secretary of defense to undertake these initiatives? if i could make one recommendation, having served 20 years, if you want the army, for example, to adopt something, you need to rate them on their oer and they are held accountable for knowing in or not knowing it. just a suggestion. >> the task force is turned to make recommendations to the secretary of defense on the report committed today. the secretary of defense, with office and staff, has to provide

a cover and implementation plan. this report will go back to congress, so i believe the accountability will be at the secretary of defense level. having said that, we included an appendix in the report for each of our recommendations for what we were recommending level of responsibility to address the implementation under recommendation. some of them were under service, summer osd, occasional ones at the congressional level. we have made recommendations on implementing that, but the report is now owned by the department of defense. they will have to provide their response and implement that.

ok, thank you again for being here on this most important topic. while we are thrilled to release the report, year-long deliberations on providing this report, we are also reminded that the real benefit of this is actually in saving lives and the actions we follow will be important. in this report, task force members presented their findings and recommendation for restricting the force and preventing suicide in members of the armed forces. the task force is confident implementing the recommendations in this report will make a significant difference to the total fitness of the force, strengthening the force, the well being of service members, and prevention of suicide. effective action must proceed in the context of stratec planning as a consistent standard us policy. this report is the bulk of our

assessnt -- and effective action. suicide is preventable. thank you all very much. we appreciate it. guest: caller: [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

.

you cannot have a solution without the other. it is also very clear with the afghanistan war would collapse and joyce situation existed that before 2001 it would imperil pakistan with the issues that the pakistan nazer now facing and conversely if pakistan were

to fe serious threat internally because of national disaster or the onslaught of the pakistan it would make it almost impossible to succeed. the strategy is one that encompasses both countries although the elements is not the same. and the military presence on the ground. the coredea behind the strategy is to leverage u.s. and military presence to create time and space hong with the afghan security forces so they could take over security for most of the country than provide room for the united states to reduce combat footprint on the ground.

in pakistan and the strategy is multifaceted. much more complex of strengthening the relations for doing everything we want to do and accomplish with south asia with the economy and pakistan the united states started a strategic dialue with pakistan to assist the country with economic development also with fred relieve also to that point* and the other element is to bring afghanistan and pakistan together so that the policies and positions of the two countries would support what we're trying to accomplish. having said that, it is a multifaceted strategy and some are specific to afghanistan or pakistan some applied to both of them. there is a different metrics

associated with different elements. and afghanistan we are still just about the full implementation of the additional troops that have been committed three have that change of command with general petraeus but many other elements are beginning to have an impact and there we have a concerted civilian and military push to get the different pieces together. pakistan in some ways we had more success because this is a government to government engagement. our impact with us sustain pakistan with one of the civilian economic issues was more physical not the management of u.s. military or civilian summit ground. essentials david goal is to change the direction the

shape and nature of the u.s. pakistan relation. that has become palpable obviously we are meeting with the impact rovell long neglect of the relationship and with 189 i would say overall we are doing well. the strategy has been moving forward the area i concentrate most with pakistan we are seeing much more with the impact of our effort to chan the relationship specs say a word if you well about the humanitarian disaster that is the afflicting pakistan. >> just looking athe

numbers, the size of the territory and the secretary of state has said more people are affected and the population of new york state. most of the country not only had millions of people have been displaced about 20 million and the enormous amount of pressure is brought to bear as refugees move from one place to the next then have to be taken care of ituts a lot of pressure on the literally on the ground governance because the way in which the floods work and then reconstructions will be difficult going forward. what pakistan needs in order to do with the immediate impact of the flood which is that it lost said good share of the export crop and a good share of its food which makes the enormous impact on poverty issues and also

sheer damage to infrastructure with several hundred bridges and water canals have then damage or deliberately broken and all of these are issues that pakistan faces and we are very concerned abouthe long run impact on the institution of governance and stability. the way in which the united states has reacted with the importance of this strategy puts in place and the u.s. was able to react very quickly largely because of the interagency teams put together especially with the office of the special representative of pakistan which has made for much more easier to address these ises maybe it was cobbled

together after the operations last year that enable very rapid reaction and collaboration between state department's to get a helicopter aircraft carrier to pakistan to provide immediate relief. and also we were very cognizant all 22 convince pakistan there is a strategic partnership between these two countries. would they be exemplified by the way in which the united states was most effective among all of the other members of the international committee including pakistan or other close friends? in terms of moving the ball for word impacting u.s. pakistan relations and a positive manner the united states has risen

appropriately to the opportunity but that does not mean the challenges are done and it requires working with pakistan very closely to minimize the impact. >> day-care -- thank you for joining us this morning. can you give us a perspective on debt to issu and two points and "the washington post" that the pakistani is and i'd

like hell of you help explain pakistan seems to b playing both sides in terms of working with the united states but also maintaining an ambiguous relationship with the taliban supposedly with our joint enemy still meant that was usually importuned for pakistan

cabe cabe [captions copyright national cable satellite corp 2010] movie tracks we have a view on that but i think without going into the evolution i don't think there is any real alternative now with capacity building with afghanistan's supports so

the forces don't have to do that to 31 to an economy but of course, we want the afghan forces to have the capability to take care of the situation so there's no spillover to pakistan. of the other track is the reintegration and reconciliation to bring that about it is marty afghan initiative that is what the u.s. is talking about but is supportive of that to in the violence is impacting pakistan and the military

track on which the strategy is moving we had success and help mend and to deliver the particular situation for what was done so i don't see a major or minor difference of opinion and it is very much like the stabilization as much as possible. then of course, when he outlined the u.s. strategy which perhaps from our point* of view that the u.s.

iselping pakistan stabilize, develop capacity for the economic security at the moment for the insurgency and the rest. of course, they have been doing this over a period of time after in terms of biions of dollars coming from pakistan into the u.s. and right now the west is heavily in support of the government but it is as unpopular and pakistan. i have seen those reports and i guess it depends on who you are talking to.

in where the two companies are interacted with those of the financial institutions which had opened pakistan and to answer his estion i would say in my opinion what happens with pakistan the negative side comes up and that takes on the whole relations. for what it is doing for

pakistan and the other question martin prose is more difficult after pakistan having sort of having a double policy of supporting the u.s. that with its intest and the other of having its own interest. of course, pakistan has its own interests and concerns but i think wn pakistan gets news of this because with the past, present, and future end then to mel all three together to come to the conclusion so when pakistan enters and has a strategy it has nothing to do with the present.

it projects orders to take care. that situation i think has changed. there are so many things that have happened since then that the strategy is unthinkable and pakistan was so many intricate linkages in a position to follow and an unnamed officials are talking about to do this or do that but with the authoritative sources with isi being in contact with

taliban. they have been in contact with the taliban since it was created that does not mean the isi moves against the u.s. it could be helping the u.s. with the taliban and as a move toward reconciliation or integration or whatever you call it, this will become more and more important. the last point* is whatever may have been pakistan's ambition, both have been scaled down drastically they have been scaled down within the country for what had become most important is the economy of pakistan that will take center stage to

recover what we lost. >> thank you. we will come back to some of those issues with this strategy that was based so for to play the role that was assigned is a strategy and also the taliban would be prepared to break a al qaeda is some kind of political reconciliation on the battlefield. so how low do you view the u.s. strategy at the moment and read the were still concerned.

>> i am not sure about the second of those two assumptions which is the linchpin in my argument but i would like so to give me a chance to ink about these subjects. to say something very briefly of the afghan setting to annotate a little with what vali nasr said it also to imitate what general jehangir karamat was saying as well. my concern all along with evaluang the u.s. international strategy n.m. pakistan was two the extent to avoid it was cognizant of afghan politics as those are recognized by afghans. short-handed this strategy in afghanistan is comparable to the one that is now being executed and iraq to build up security forces to take

leave of combat gradually to allow of nato forces to exit the directly combat role they had been playing to remain in a supporting role to provide the afghan security forces with a monopoly on technology and air power and other sources of the effectiveness. we see a dilemma which the united states has built up indigenous secure a force is betterncreasingly not capable enough to stand alone but what government are they loyal to? in den iraq if that question is still at issue this summer. the security forces have been quite patient with iraqi politicians to which the security forces can be loyal but my concern is that there is not as much political resilience in afghanistan for a mismatch between security forces and

national unity politics. my concern about the way american political strategy in afghanistan has been executed until recently is a bit very proud less focused and has not yet been able to bring in this stakeholders that could build national unity in afghanistan as though the s.a. the referred to in the republic my principal goal is to try to outline the imperative strategy of national political unity and afghanistan. and order to create the resilience to build security forces and to consider the possibility of strategic negotiations with the taliban i do not believe the politics can digests reconciliation of less approaches those into a position of true your day. if the taliban becomes a wedge of actual or ethnic

wedge then the risk of a return of the 1990's to solution is significant. that is my political view of afghanistan but with pakistan i just want to go back to the question of the ambiguity of the pakistani security institutions and their attitude to say i respt what the general said about the difference between thinking of the past, present, and future as the righframework to evaluate this. you cannot wish away the past. it does not include the pakistani strategy of hedging through an dm through malicious that we either believe to be loyal to the pakistani state or manageable in the subway and that complex built up and now has turned against the state. it is paying a very high price to bottle those

elements of the complex sadr earlier nurtured to turn against it. . .

let me just finish with one kind of proposition one. if the question for american policy, and i think it is in part would be to ask whether as partners with the state of pakistan with the pakistani military the provision are of generous aid and other sources of aid is the pakistani state doing everything that it could be reasonably asked to do o contain and break down the historical legacy of the relations with these groups? is it doing everything that could be reasonably asked to do and i would say two things about that question. one is it is obvious there is a disagreement about the question within the u.s. government. some people think absolutely against the taking it, they don't do everything one would wish but everything one could

reasonably ask them to do and there are others who say i don't think so. i think they are continuing in ways that are costing american lives and undermining the american project in afghanistan and also threatening regional stability. that question is doubly difficult because as the general says it is still opaque. there is more transfer of information. i would love to rea the index about it over time but there is no way to measure. >> thank you. you have just come back from afghanistan and advised general mcchrystal and now working with general petraeus what is your take on how the strategy is working? >> i should preface by saying you got a piece in the issue of foreign affairs in which

basically arge it can work as long as we stay the course but i wonder if he could address specifically some of trustees concerns both about afghanistan and about pakistan. >> thanks martin and all of you for being here and to my co-authors starting with the afghan a woman who helped me write this book and is a remarkable story in courage and entrepreneurship and activity politically and economically otherwise and also people here, jason and helped with the afghan index i think what i would want to say is 2010 has certainly even for those of us who call ourselves guarded optimists though more slowly in terms of progress on the strategy than we uld have hoped and there was certainly hope, not expectation that hope that certain pars of the nato command that 2010 would show a clear shift of momentum across afghanistan or at least

the aggregate said of trends would play in a positive direction. there are not too many people saying that. general petraeus did a voice and i thought was appropriate and necessary and a olver do in some ways he shows optimism about certain parts of afghanistan in the recent interview about a week ago and he talked about helmand province we got ourselves into a rhetorical 80 academic not talking about the province this last year because we expect such great things in this one little town and the military command deserves criticism for having inflated expectations and treated as almost a litmus test of how the strategy was working and then progress there was slower than we help and now the impression is that helmand is not going that well. marjah is about 40,000 people, helmand is of 1.2 million the only other time i know of in the major prt of helmand is actually doing better than marjah.

there's a couple of exceptions in the ore extreme parts to the north and south that are not going as well but generally speaking as petraeus correctly underscore we are seeing progress there. does it address the question, however, the level with the we have a strategic partner in president karzai and whether we can view the current government as reflecting the consensus among afghans of living for were i think steve as usual has the right questions and i don't have quite as positive and over all bottom line there but i don't know. i guess the best way i can explain my reason for hopefulness without really trying to disagree with steve, because i share his concerns, but instead of ptting too much emphasis on karzai or the palace and steve bourn does not to let's also think about the af people. the afghan people are adamantly entire taliban and the only

supporters among the pashtuns and the only part of the pashtu and that supports the taliban are a tiny sliver who actually agree with them for a larger fraction who are afraid of them and so the question becomes how do we make thse people less free the change the perception of momentum? that is in many ways a more limited problem and we've seen in other insurgencies around the world where there's a fundamental desire -- to overturn the existing political order. in afghanistan we don't see that. we see people generally supportive of the notion of a central government, generally supportive of president dee dee congenital karzai despite what happened last year in the election campaign and the accurate perception many of his cronies are too corrupt. the general belief that nato is there to help and we don't see the anti-americanism in afghanisn that we saw either iraq or still see in pakistan. it's a population more supportivef fate of's presence, an again, martin,

it's not unfortately to rebut you and i wish i could, it is more to take a different light on the problem in siggerud we have partners and allies who are interested in committing to work with us and working with each other. one more point about the afghan army. the afghan armyon balance is also a think every promising institution. people talk about fissures between the general staff and the pushtu and minister of defense for a simple and their efforts to try to address that right now and it's true the tajiks are somewhat over represented so those that are not afghan specialists also insure most people in this durham understand the distinction the tall ships are primarily the northeast and the northern alliance and the resistance against the taliban and the now still constitute about 40% of the officer corps in afghanistan even though they are only about 15% of the population. but what you are seeing generally is the army is now showing secretary interethnic

fisher's. it's generally working together. there are problems in the ability to recruit pashtuns from the south into the army. that is the fundental of the mature sectarian dilemma that i would point to right now but as an institution in terms of the performance of the field is way ahead where the iraqi army was in 04 or 05. it is not ontributing to the secretary of war. it is doing much better job at trying to tap on the tension. let me just give a couple of factors and the am i will stop martin in the opening set of comments the these are not definitive or conclusive proof the elfgin or me or the country in general is going in the right direction the living give you a couple of reasons to be perhaps a bit more hopeful than some have been. i just think we need a balanced debate loveless silly me as an optimist rebutting somebody else as a pessimist but emil more balanced set of understandings of what the facts are. right now we have 85 to 90% of

all laughed and army units in the field who have partnered with a nato counterpart. this never happened before general mcchrystal. it is a great legacy of his remarkable command and let me take a moment to say how high i think of him and what he's accomplished in afghanistan and what we have in this partnering concept is even after basic training even after unit training the afghan army units then go out into this field and they are based next to a nato counterpart unit, all sizes and some places the unit may be larger other places it may be a little smaller but it's always with and one echelon of one step up or down of the size relative to the afghan unit that deployed and they've linked together. they control together and fight together when they are and pushed the nato soldiers call in air support. so the soldiers have a chance to survive the fire fight in a way they never did before the they were largely on their own and

maybe i will stop there because it is a very vivid point i don't think our lexicon has justice. we use the term of partnering. partnering is a million of the word for what is coming on. there is an apprentice ship of the forces that has much further to go than the armynd fortunately so there are caveats to what i seen by now we of hopefulness and people need to appreciate what is going on in the field. >> if you could also speak to steve's point about th need for blog reconciliation among fferent political groups and leaderships in afghanistan. >> the point is well taken. whenever you want to have a viable civilian institution in government to have to be inclusive and representative of the entire population and you never want to have civilian institutions the way they

develop because of fracture and i also think we are cognizant when you have financial institutions that are just growing whether it is an eyebrow eckertfghanistan there is always a danger that particular issues could threaten them and that is something that we have to remain vigilant as you suggest i think we move forward. i would say there are some fundamental differences in the kind of problems we face in iraq and afghanistan has a political leadership that does not ssume power for the first time or the last election to tremendously contentious problems where iraq the problems are producing the political leadership itself it just can't select a prime minister and the period. now, you know, the picture is the obviously changing. there is no formal reconciliation. president karzai iniatedhe

peace jirga that will have to address the issue and what happens next whether or not there is any kind of success with integration etc. would obviously be the deciding factor. on the other side of the issue about pakistan and afghanistan we are trying to build a government capacity and make it more capable and pakistan in the long run the game should be to prevt that from eroding. to prevent particularly the danger of the flood and it is right now for humanitarian reasons but the long run the threat is the flood is greatest on the local governments and the floods washing away in pakistan. now, you know, the criticisms i made of the strategy of pakistan

in the past are fairly familiar in the public media and government and we are dealing with a country of 175 million plus people which we are dealing also with a legacy since 1918 a 20 plus year period of relations with pakistan that has gone the wrong direction. every one kows and the legacy of sometimesives large on pakistan thinking of what we call the gap in the u.s.. we have to deal with that and in order to set the relationship right going forward in afghanistan to sustain pakistan we have to deal with that. we are intensifying our engagement with the regionf the world that would fund the periphery of the will of the

policy and the mdle east and south asia for a long period of time we cannot cover the whole set of space that is required in short order but if we were to say our engagement in pakistan over the past year has gone significant measure trying to convince pakistanis this is not a fly by night engagement. that we will address the issues and we are in their friend as the flood shows we do care about them as american, not american government but as a people who care about the suffering of other people and we are willing to rise to the location and we would like a way forward to the internal relationship the was by and large a transaction of relationship into strategic relationship i would say we have made progress. this is an ongoing effort and also we have to note the picture is changing very rapidly.

the pakistan of the past year since i've been working has begun through enormous stakes d peaks and troughs. a year ago there was talk the government may collapse before the taliban onslaught and reached 70 kilometers from jalalabad. it is the engagement of the intervals of war that drives a lot of complicated issues that are planted to the economic integrity challenged by water and now the flood has completely turned its society and economy upside down. and all of those are factors here. the important factors in our relationship and they are also important challenges to the pakistani government and i think they are looking forward in terms of, you kno, stability in the region and also taking a

measure of this. so why don't see this as a sort of black and white and then the measure would be a much it's changed. but, you know, we have embarked on a policy of serious engagement in a different way in afghanistan and pakistan and particularly given the issues raised on pakistan in terms of the advancing our goal in petit jury pakistan's view of afghanistan particularly of its relationship with us is we've moved forward and we are still 15, 16% approval rati which is abysmal and a country we would like to think of as a close ally but i think some days of the week that is double what it was. [laughter] significant improvement. [laughter]

>> [inaudible] [laughter] please come in on this but also steve put the issue on the table and i would like you to tell us how pakistan views led to for america which is looming as a larger threat than we had imagined before. >> i don't speak for the government of course but i am giving my opinion and steve asked me an important question and i think he's right there is a divide which i sense on this question is pakistan and doing everything that it could be asked to do or is it actually -- my short answer to that is without unraveling the state and without creating internal chaos

within pakistan, pakistan is doing everything possible to support the u.s. strategy in afghanistan and work things out with india. now whi am saying this is in each of the tracks that we've identified on which the u.s. strategy is moving in afghanistan there are massive uncertainties. [inaudible] would you want built up in the security forces and the government in afghanistan to manage it is still on the table. there is a attition rate as high as 47 to 48% in the process which are but up in afghanistan right now so we want the forces to be built up but right now there is aquestion. we all want this to move forward but there is an uncertainty. there's uncertainty on many of the things steve talked about.

the ability to bring about unity in the government and balance it and those are the uncertainties we will have to live with because there is even absurdity of a strategy what is going to result in a victory or not impact. it is moving well as i said the casualties are high which was expected perhaps expectations but also lead to some disappointment but the fact is whilit is into othe areas there is uncertainty there is talk. on every integration yes there is uncertainty will the taliban come and and will be part of the government and be accepted or will that continue to be unbalanced and the taliban to what they did before.

there are things pakistan has to live with and within these constraints pakistan is doing everything possible to support the u.s. strategy in afghanistan the other point is there was enormous public opposition to any commitment of the pakistan military. today nobody is saying anything agnst in the western border areas starting from swat. because we don't rsh things we wait for public opinion to change and it changed once the taliban were identified as antistate and people who commit atrocities and who are basically for political power we can governor within power the moment

is the can clear the public opinion changed and the public and was usually supportive of the counterinsurgency campaign in other areas and it has been going on for years now. >> just to interrupt you on this point becauseow with the flood affect that support operation in the west but now clearly the army is going to support different to help flood victims and so o. is that going to divert attention, is that going to dey the expected campaign of north waziristan? >> yes of course it is because the military is the lead agency. it's diverted 60 or 70 tall cent to the disaster relief and most of the limited aviation used in the west have been diverted to disaster relief.

so while i can say the entire flood situation as we do have eventually political the economic security in pact, the economic impact which is going to be the worst, possibly going to take years for pakistan to recover from that with the flood waters recede and the agency take over the military will be free to get back to its duties so it is to say perhaps what dana the military made in the west are not going to be lost because it is capable of holding against any kind of threat. some of the operations which may have been planned are likely to be delayed and there is again coming up in the context of the flood that militant organizations are gathering relief.

theyust be to live in those areas and they would it very much like to get into the public and gain support and sympathy at make inroadsbut limited tradition of all things here and there. this is a disaster on the national scale where you need relief from helicopters, trucks, hovercrafts, everything used this has nothing like that so it could be insignificant. >> steve, feel free to come and comment because one question i want to shift to before we go to the audience which is called us president obama's timetable affect the calculations michael talked about starting to withdraw troops next summer and to view the strategy this december and how does that play into the calculation of the various parties we've been talking about?

>> it's been a very sycophant factor all the way to think that the assign additional petraeus as a countervailing effect over the last coupleof months. in economics and markets you have the concept of discounting for future events and so if we look at market prices today we would assume the wism will discount the possibility of future inflation or future recession. the impact of the 20 date was to cause at durres on the ground to discount nato departure to take for granted essentially in start hedging and i think that the general referred to the uncertainties even before you introduced theparticular time line in the midst of a whole series of on certain projects it would have been caused, reasonable cause to hedge against uncertainty that the date that caused that hedging to increase in pace and intensity.

now that isn't limited to the government of pakistan. that is everybody including a lot of actors inside afghanistan and other regional governments and so forth. i do think the president and general petraeus of them as much as they possibly could to block back the affect the created by nning that date. and i do think that to some extent not there is more stability of the timeline, the perception of the time line than there was six months ao. i was in afghanistan in april and there was great deal on certainty where things were going and what peace and i think things settled down this summer. a lot now will deepen the and so there's a kind of understanding that we are talking about the transition that will last from 2011 to 2015, some place in that time line and that to the general petraeus's influence in advising about the pace of that transition is politically untouchable in the united states in most circumstances and

barring some catastrophic said events in afghanistan with a sudden collapse of american strategy the timeline is now more misunderstood. >> and there is still hedging going on. >>f i could add to that i agree with steve the administration is doing a little better job of trying to explain the strategy but i think it would help to have and have explicit statement by the president of what his thinking is and i'm not suggesting he take away any and all the ambiguity on the policy. i think he deliberately wants flexibility what to do next summer and specifically what i interpret this to give the different comments we've seen from the administration and especially from him is that he doesn't have if things are going well to have a gradual conditions based hand over to the afghans over the period of years he reserves the right to reassess should the strategy not be succeeding and goes to a more

minimalist plan be along the lines of the counterterrorism specific approach with fewer u.s. forces and less ambitious goal for afghanistan we know some people in his administration were advising him to out of last fall when the post mcchrystal's idea of the increase. president therefore should see the following i intend and hope for a gradual conditions based plan. he never says hat. gates says that, mike mahlon says that, clinton, petraeus, the president doesn't like to say that. the robust he said is on the russian president was visiting in june and we are not going to turn off the lights next july i would prefer a stronger speech from the commander-in-chief and i think he can preserve his leverage on various parties and a little bit of cover with of the democratic congress and by being a little more direct to say it will take three or four years to phase out. the good news is 30,000 u.s. troops a year starting late next year if that is indeed a reality

and frankly if it doesn't work out we will probably leave tester and i reserve the right as president to make that call. i think that kin of statement would be more productive for most of the audience listening to him than the extreme discretion brder on the policy of the bread consion that i think he sometimes about it. lenders and the logic behind his thinking. i just don't think his approach maximized his own benefit to the current policy. >> thank you. let's go to the audience for questions. you need to identify yourself and have a question at the end of the sentence. write down the back from a philadelphia. >> philadelphia inquirer. i would like to ask theivilian

government has been unable to build in the areas the pakistan military cleared even before the flood. and what i'm wondering now since there are so many new areas which will desperately need building who is going to do that building? and if the military is called on then does that mean basically the fight against insurgency comes to a halt and is the military capable of that or is the ivilian government capable of crdinating with international agencies which doesn't appear to be the case and one further queson on that line internal stability. the number of interest secretary the killings is rising with the civil war going on in karachi between the factions, shiite

being blown up. is the social fabric which already under great stress going to be even more stress dramatically by the flood and government ineptitude and if so, then what. >> let sa th i ssue of the government response to the flood in pakistan is not quite as it appears on the old site. first the number of deaths are not as high as they were because of the evacuation plan particularly as he moved towards southern punjab. this is the most peoplehought would be overrun with tremendous amount of damage that has not happened because of defective building and releasing the water out. it's not that the government has completely failed and sappeared.

second focus is largely on the national government in pakistan whenas the most important element in management of both the of folding of the disaster anthe early response and as we go forward as local government and unless the water literally forced the government to pack up a bag into this family moved to a refugee camp they have basically worked well. now you know the northwest is a very different place than punjab. the government on these places are very different. the local governments are quite different. the capacities and capabilities are quite dferent just as the way in which the flood is being managed is quite different than it was in the northwest frontier. so i'm not convinced that we could just take it for granted that the government will be completely incapable in the the military has to do everything.

and also in the northwest, the main area the issue of the reconstruction came up in the ring of swat and that had to do that with the way in which the palatine dee dee katella then ran before they were dislodged and the damage they did to the government in that region literally a fisa rating local government and then swot remained the war so whereas southern punjab are not war zones. there are many other elements that can be brought to bear. but what ever political issues that might be afoot in pakistan this is also in and of itself at this point in time at a humanitarian lvel. so how this is addressed to the international community addresses the immediate need is far more indicative how quickly pakistan can regroup and the

social political crisis and also i must add there is a great deal of vindication the country has come together around this issue and we don't see the flood as breakingp to political faction there are continued attacks and the bombing of the mosque in the northwest area across the region 30 some people killed with acts of violence and the extremists opering on a different agenda and the government wll face the same problem, such religious and now the flood has had a unified impact. >> i think that he's doing a great job. >> complement of pakistan. [laughter]

>> my experience is that in this disaster the government regardless of what they're doing always get criticized whether this katrina or tsunami. what other faces the brunt of that criticism for not responding quickly and not doing enough so that has happened and comparing the western border with the interior there is a difference as many pointed out. the agencies had difficulty operating in the western area because it is an ongoing situation. it is a security hazard so the military became to the lead agency not only for clearing the area holding a but was in the process of rehabilitating the area and moving back people when the floods hit so that is different. the rest of the coutry is the easier ones the water recedes

which is we are ld is likely to happen in two weeks or so and people start moving back many more economic assistance the government already announced and taking care of things like that which they are getting enormous international support and i think they will be able to handle that. yes internal security which you talk about is a huge problem. karachi if you're a member in the 90's went to affairs and then stabilized politically motivated the secretary of violence. we do have these assassinations taking place in baluchistan targeted a low level of movement they're t significant but still causing enormous damage in rms of loss of life and the

government is trying to get over that situation. >> let's take one from the back. >> thank you. my name is tom i am a retired foreign service officer. i'm not an expert but i served and spent some time in afghanistan more recently. two questions, one for stevan and one for the general. first for steve, in terms of local afghan governments and what we perhaps sloppily labeled the building of civil society, a lot of the warlords have come back and establish themselves running the same kind of networks they did before and in many cases the stability in the areas and the effective administration and getting support for that and of course it is a trade-off in the long term interest of trying to build what is good for the afghan society or present conditions

such that they can't be diensed with. and i'm wondering what your views are on how bad the bargain is. for the general, what i was wondering for many years with pakistan has the related to afghanistan or hasn't done has been seen through the complicated prism of the strategic political relationship with india and although i don't want to suggest the indian problem with relations has gone away or changed significantly was wondering now that you are no longer in office as the chief of army staff lm ken did you would care to be on how the sinking within the pakistan army might have changed in terms of being mesmerized by the indian threat. thank you. >> well, the observations certainly are endorsed in the nse that there has been a

trade-off and american engagement in afghanistan since the fall of the taliban between the pursuit of security and the pursuit of the possible stabilizing politics and expedient pursuit of security particularly in the period between 2002 and 2007 or 2008 generally prevailed. the united states was engaged in another war during much of the yearsand didn't resort the conflict anywhere near adequately. and one of the ways that i got away with the approach to the country was to develop expedient relations as with for war lords an turn politics over to them in such areas. it is a bargain. it's very difficult to unravel a bargain like that instantly in the context of even an ambitious counterinsurgency campaign. i would only just say to go back to my drum beat about the importance of afghan politics

perce that a successful inclive apprach to afghan politics during the transition per go ahead, one that has a prayer of success, requires vision of national unity but also response to the dilemma that you described to him. that is more inclusive local politics. it is stunning when you traveled around afghanistan to appreciate how top-down local administration remains and the governors come and go. exile of one disfavor with the palace or with the americans and who are shuffled around from province to province. the operation of kandahar was suspended in part because i ink when the united states in the late period of general mcchrystal's command to the edge of the campaign they intended the realized the didn't have a plausible inclusive and successful local political

strategy to complement their military plans and actually admire the decision not to go forward in the recognition because there is not -- you can't just make them look as you go along which was more or less the plan. so i think the parliamentary elections are probably the next concrete way in which this bargain is going to measured by the afghan people,. >> general? >> the figures in pakistan's strategic very prominently. i won't say that we don't consider india a threat any more. the situation is still there. but the obsession with india in terms of premeditated deliberate attack on pakistan i think

reseeded into the background and because the economic factor for india and pakistan has become extremely important and i think there are lobbies in india and pakistan working on a peace strike so pakistan for several years now has been taking the good hard look at itself. it's facing internal instability of the cirmstances whilehe threats, are there, its policy is to work on threat reduction through diplomacy dialogue all nonmilitary means so it can focus its energies on its internal stability. >> i just want to put another issue on the table here someplace in the times today there was another story about corruption in the palace and you have strong views on this issue and what we are doing wrong and we should do if you want to

address that. >> thanks martin and i would also like to mention on the issue of the indian threat, steve is finishing his but all the indian army and in two weeks we will have it back here and i'm sure to do to assure both of us would invite you back to that. but on the corruption issue this is such a complex matter and we've seen our afghan france pushback recently whatever we criticize them too much for corrupon they point out we are part of the problem and frankly of your body that is criticizing the other is correct about how this has worked through i don't think there are too many americans, there are some but not too many who are delirately personally corrupt the system that we have built is not very effective, and in my truck and may in afghanistan i was disturbed by how many top nato american officials were not all the same page with each other about what the strategy should be for confronting this. the specific issue that i felt i had some understanding of, and this is only one element of the

broad of can corruption problem but it's the way in which our military deployment in this self-defense uncertain elfgin contractors, certain of can strongmen, disproportionately off by karzai is the most famous and there are a couple of others. what we have done is in the interest of trying to meet the deployment schedule set up by the president we have rushed and one of the ways you russiais by working with people you already know and that means you pump more money into the same hands who are already benefiting from the system, and therefore to the exclusion of many other afghan tribes and leaders who are not of the karzai family spifically at kandahar. i think we need to therefore refrain the issue a little bit. we are not going to eliminate corruption in afghanistan but we do need to view our presence as providing a certain form of patronage which needs to be better distributed. it needs to be more equitable and if some of that is corrupti then we have to

distinguish between different types of corruption. somere regrettable but tolerable and other types fuel the nsurgency and it's the latter that troubled me and specifically you put all of your money into a couple of people's hands and make others upset and their tribes are more likely to support the insurgency. i don't think there has been muchppreciation what to do about this. the simple answer is of course to broaden the base of those who benefit from the buildup. that is easier said than done but it wasn't even commonly recognized as a core element of what our strategy should be going forward among the different people spoke to. written for has been progress since then that we are behind e curve on this one. okay let's take another question. the leedy here. >> laura from the irish times and i would like to ask when the

president last december 1st announced he was sending another 30 fell sent troops beating he tripled the number of u.s. troops in afghanistan and at the very same time said the drawdown would begin in july 2011 was yet to lead providing himself with an alibi in advance saying so he could say to the general to the idp would you asked for i give you the surge. it hasn't worked and now we are getting out. is that a possible reading of what has happened? and second to talk to the different perceptions in the pentagon and the white house of the war and afghanistan. is there a certain tension between flexible vice president joe biden's strategy of using drones and using far fewer soldiers and also are we headed for confrontation congenital petraeus in recent interviews has said he would